+1.

German penetration table for the commonplace 7,92mm SmK v round, at different ranges and angles, striking the armor plate directly (cont. lines) or indirectly (hitting a 3mm thick dural plate at 20 degrees 1,5 meters before the the armor plate).

For reference, the armor thickness on the Spitfire noted. I believe the Hurricane had the same thicknesses.

Apparanatly a lot was dependent on wheter the bullet hit anything before it struck armor plate. If not, it could go through it rather easily. I am not sure if the Spit had 3 mm thick dural plating on the fuselage (it seems unlikely to me, given that the 'deflector plate' cowling over the tank was only 3.5mm thick and it was considered to be a reinforced part to deflect bullets) but 20 degrees angle of impact and 1.5 meters of spacing does seem practical.

You're stretching your specific evidence to cover all cases. It shows 1% penetration when angled 60 degrees to the line of fire.

Well, we know that they existed, so if this source doesn't cover them then we'll just ignore it, I guess.

Okay, so they're uncommon. It doesn't give a time frame. I don't understand how this means they should be removed.

You're framing the question to suit your pre-conceived notions. The Germans developed large-calibre cannons so that they could destroy heavy bombers more easily and rapidly. By contrast, the USAF decided to stick with lighter machine guns (50 cal, etc) because they were effective enough against fighters. If machine guns weren't good enough then the USAF would have adapted.

And I think it's up to you to prove that they weren't. Your evidence has been reviewed, and found lacking.

As previously noted, depends entirely on the angle. Furthermore, nobody in this thread has presented proof that the pilots in question are doing it from dead astern. Plenty of spitfire pilots will haul back on the stick at slightest provocation, often presenting a planform-view shot, with easy line-of-sight to the canopy which was not armored.

Facts which have been overstated/misconstrued.

Anyways, if you want to continue this side-topic you should start a new thread as someone else suggested.

I'll interpret that as you choosing option #2.

I applaud you for choosing not to continue smearing the names of good pilots simply because they are better than you, as it would seem some participants in this thread are content to do, despite not having a shred of evidence.

I personally find the "he killed me, he must be cheating" attitude to be just as pathetic as cheating itself.

Gawd..were not trying to remove ammo now are we?

blimey

S!

Ze-Jamz..you said it out loud. Just wait for the Purist Battalion and their funny sidekicks to march in and demand it ;) :D On a more serious note can't the servers restrict loadouts like in IL-2 1946? Would solve these fantasy beltings etc.

I recall asking this to be added as a server side options and was imediatly jumped on :( looks like I was correct after all.

P.S. I use a (for the most part) historical belt in my aircraft :P

Salute

1. The SmK (H) Tungsten round is clearly causing an ahistorical imbalance, since it makes the E-1's weapons more effective than the E-3's and E-4's, not accurate representation of the real situation.
2. The round was in very short supply, its not even listed in the game as part of the standard E-1 loadout, unlike the Dewilde Inciendary round in the Spitfires and Hurricanes or the M-Geschoss in the E-4.
3. We don't have an accurate determination of exactly how good this round was.

I am not raising an issue about the M-Geschoss, that was clearly part of the battle, and an real indicator of which direction the Luftwaffe was taking its air to air weapons program in 1940, ie. towards 20mm weapons.

I'd be happy to see a server with historical beltings, including restricting the British to limited numbers of DeWilde rounds.

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence. Please quote a source that states the round was "in very short supply".

Go back and read my posts.

I did. You seem to be confusing "my source doesn't mention the tungsten ammo" or "the tungsten ammo was less common than the standard ammo" with "the tungsten ammo was in short supply"

If you can't quote it, then I'll accept that you agree.

Salute

First of all, we're talking about the SmK (H) round, not the standard version. I have no issue with the standard AP round being included, it was part of the historical 109 7.92mm loadout, the SmK (H) was not, as mentioned previously the Dewilde was standard loadout, so was the M-Geschoss.

2nd, in relation to the penetrative abilities of the standard AP round, the only relevant line in your graph is the slashed one, showing the penetration after hitting duraluminum sheeting first, since in order to hit the pilot armour the round would need to penetrate the aircraft skin. Note also the chart does not take into account the effect of hitting one of the Spitfires aluminum struts or formers, much more substantial.

Lots of them.

http://cutawaycreation.files.wordpre...pg?w=593&h=421

Just to be pedantic ;):

In many historical cases, absence of evidence is evidence of absence. It's then a matter of degree or probability how strong that evidential gap is with respect to the event proposed.

I think what you mean to say is that absence of evidence is not PROOF of absence.

My dog smiles with his tail.

...am I helping?

Not confused, the ammunition was in short supply, wasn't part of the standard loadout.

Did it exist as part of a Luftwaffe ordinance plan? No idea. Probably, at some point, who knows when?

I actually think its up to advocates for its use to prove it was a part of the battle.

More importantly, like other glitches which affect the game, it is creating an ahistorical enviroment.

You don't have a source, but you keep claiming there was some kind of ammo shortage with that particular round.

I don't know if people are or aren't using 100% 8mm tungsten, but even if they are, is it really an issue? If 2cm cannon rounds easily penetrate aircraft armour (ball goes through about 14mm worth at 200m - that's more than twice the thickness of a Spit back plate) what's the difference? It just means that an E 1 can probably kill you just as quick as an E 3, if it gets rounds on your head or back plate. The trick of course, as others have already pointed out, is to avoid a situation where this can happen. Much easier said than done of course but that's the challenge.

Nope not at all.

Actually M-Geschoss actually had poor penetration when it came to armour, what it did was penetrate the skin of the aircraft, then explode, and because of the large amount of explosive filling, more than a standard HE round, the explosive force was enough to blow whole sections of the aircraft skin off, and without the skin strength, the structures of wings and fuselage often failed.

This particular 7.92mm tungsten round in the game gives the German side an ahistorical advantage which they did not have.

It allows players to load up 2000 rounds and 60 seconds worth of firing into the E-1, and get equal power, same penetration as a 20mm AP round, more firing time, and better accuracy than the 20mm cannon in the E-3 and E-4, which the Luftwaffe said was a better weapons system, and which only allowed Luftwaffe pilots 7 seconds of firing time.

The game has created a weapons system for the 109's which isn't based on any kind of historical reality. The Germans were converting their MG armed E-1's as fast as they could into cannon armed versions because the cannon versions were more effective. The real life pilots complained when they had to fly the E-1's. The opposite is happening in CoD. Go on the servers, the guys who have the biggest scores are flying the E-1, and Blue flyers are converting wholesale into this plane from the E-3 and E-4.

Where are the tests showing what this round could do in penetrative terms? Where are the historical records showing its use in Luftwaffe fighters in 1940? No one has produced anything.

What we have now is a legal hack, we might as well allow the Germans to use the pulse cannon of the Su-26.

Tally Ho Gents!

Wasn't Paul Richie given a near fatal neck wound from an AP round going through his hurricane's seat back plate whilst he was in France? Circa 1939/1940. Can't get to the book at the mo but will confirm.

I remember that the undertone was that after this everyone had noted that the 'game had changed'.

Regards

Badger

Maybe there is nothing wrong with weapon system, but there is something wrong with DM? Repka server is very good for pointing this, because it is possible to fight against any plane there. If E4 hits another BF109 there, wings break off 8 out of 10 times. If E4 hits Spit, Spit gets damage in various parts, but still continues to fly and even soaks another 1-2 bursts of MG-FF/M before it crashes due to control damage or pilot death. It is easier and faster to kill pilot with tungsten rounds, than to kill Spit with mine shells, and that stimulates preference for E1. If MG-FF/M (or even MG-FF) had similar effect on Spit like it has on BF, no one would bother with E1.

So true . . .


I feel the discussion of the ammo is relevant, even though the devs won't patch to fix it in ClOD, possibly maybe after the sequel,

but its good to get it out now, so in the sequel, the ammo can be more historically correct . . . and issues like this is on their minds.



I just had to say this, even though its already been said.



This is wrong. With this attitude you won't help anyone, just throw false accusations. You call someone out and tarnish their rep with out evidence.

I know its possible to cheat. Shoot when Call of Duty 3 was released or Black Ops, within the hour, people were cheating (more so on PS3). on WOW (blizzard mmorpg) when they released cataclysm (new add on), on the day of, between the lags, there was cheating going on . . . and Blizzard puts alot of effort into stopping the cheaters.


But if you feel strongly someone is cheating compile evidence, have video, get other witnesses, etc. That way you help yourself and everyone else on the server, and help people to know about the cheat, help in development in the game (and the devs can fix it / the guys hosting the server can do something about it).

Even if you can't do anything about it, putting the evidence out there will put it on the devs or the ones running the server to do something about it, or at least warn others so they know.

You don't take a holier than thou attitude in this. If you're going to call someone out, back up with facts and proof. If you can't, its just hearsay.

Otherwise be quiet about it, and if they are known for cheating eventually they'll get caught and your suspicions are correct. And if they aren't, then they've earned their reputations and will continue to pwn people.


ok back to the ammo discussion. . .

Not really. The cannons on the 109 kick like hell and go all over the place... firing above 100 metres with cannon is a waste of ammo. Thats why guys with high scores use the E1 plus the extra ammo...

Fellas neither side can prove how abundant these rounds were and I'm guessing the devs couldn't either so they are modeled...get over it

You've count de whilde in abundance which causes a lot of DMG to a 109, you talk about the big hitters using the e1....not true

Numbers of E1 have risen due to you harping on in this thread

ALSO

Beos do not work online in any 109 so regardless what model you take were going to load SMKh

Just stop on your quest now

EDIT
Seriously we've gone from the whiners and the fanbois at war for how long? Now we've got the finished no more updates on CoD certain members have finished from here crawled back under there rocks but now we've got another breed of purists counting the rivots..

If people want to load 100% of a certain ammo let them do it, you play your historical load out game but don't try and force it on others...go play a server that sanctions it...

In every game off every genre on every forum your get the ones shouting the loudest who are on the receiving end just like the blues moaning about the spits Alt advantage in game now yada yada..

Sort it out before you get the ammo changed too

"It allows players to load up 2000 rounds and 60 seconds worth of firing into the E-1,..."

Well sort of. The MG 17 has a cyclic rate of about 1200 rounds per minute. The two cowling guns have up to 1000 rpg. This should give you about 50 seconds of continuous fire, at least in theory. The 17s in the wings had up to 500 rpg. This would give you about 20 seconds of fire. So, in reality, just like the E 3/4, the E 1 has just two weapons that should provide more than about 20 seconds of continuous fire.

"The game has created a weapons system for the 109's which isn't based on any kind of historical reality. The Germans were converting their MG armed E-1's as fast as they could into cannon armed versions because the cannon versions were more effective. The real life pilots complained when they had to fly the E-1's. The opposite is happening in CoD. Go on the servers, the guys who have the biggest scores are flying the E-1, and Blue flyers are converting wholesale into this plane from the E-3 and E-4."

The ammo issue is clearly an anomaly, but it's hardly the only one. Others include the ability of Spits to shrug off catastrophic cannon damage and continue fighting, or to lose an elevator with no apparent reduction in turning performance. Unless you're suggesting that individuals are actually using the tungsten ammo anomaly, in conjunction with some sort of aim bot, I really struggle to see why its such a big deal. If you allow someone to assume a good shooting position on your six then chances are, tungsten or no tungsten, you're unlikely to make it home.

Very well said. To go further this is actually a reaction by blue flyers to what red was doing. For a very long time 99% of red was flying Spits exclusively, nobody was using Hurricanes. Since Spit wings absorb 20mm shells like a sponge some blue pilots, including myself, changed their tactics to something that would be more effective against Spitfires. If you can't kill the machine you had to kill the pilot. Considering how vulnerable the 109 is to cooling system, engine, fuel tank, and even pilot damage much of what is being said in this thread is just sour grapes.

Totally agree, the spits have a ludicrous DM.

If you fly at 3000m above an airfield in a 109 for any length of time and your going to be going down. Now do the same in a spit, it just soaks up damage like its made of 20mm thick titanium!!!!!

This is the simple truth, I have flown both red and blue.

All kills are PK in this Hurri vid as you could see before. This is not a privilege of tungsten only but of any AP ammo and aiming at the center of aircraft instead of wings (sharp at convergence range). A pilot is the softest part of an airplane.

http://youtu.be/ZczgdRRdGV8

I think it is possible to limit certain loadouts on server side via scripting if needed. MG just gave us a possibility to use different loadouts. Offline it is a responsibility of a mission-maker to include historic loadouts (this is the reason we can not change it offline). There is probably a way to do this online too, C# scripters know better.

Using the default 109 loadout I have good success against the Spits. I always try to make my first burst on the inside port wing. With the resulting oil leak his time in the sky is now on the clock:-P Many times a fire breaks out and he is forced to hit the silk.

I have to agree and disagree at the same time with this statement. Holes in my wing, control surfaces shot off? Time to make a run for it, you cannot effectively fight with such damages, as your turning ability is extremely FUBAR.
Have you ever tried to outturn an experienced 109 driver, when he notices that you are in trouble? Probably not, because you are dead before long.

At the same time, there is definitely something wrong with the Spitfires DM.
How many times was i set on fire? Never!

S!

I was set on fire twice so far when my engine got shredded and I saw orange flames left and right of my cockpit.

never had that either, usually for me it´s one of 3 scenarios:

1. wing ripped to shreds -> B/O
2. controls gone -> B/O (i´m not thinking of any particular 6./JG26 pilot, now do i david :D )
3. PKed -> RIP

You may have forgotten that in these days the following occurs very often:

4. Water/Oil Radiator is perforated/damaged leaking and you have to B/O :grin:

you are right, forgot that one :D

well urizen, meanwhile i practised to make pilot kills, and im quite successfull doing so...so you might soon notice a difference.... :)

I'm calling Bullsh*t on this.

I have already provided proof these rounds were 1-2% of the total LMG rounds manufactured, in addition, there was a known shortage of Wolfram the raw material used to manufacture Tungsten Acid, which was such the whole manufacture of the material was discontinued in 1942.

In addition, the Wehrmacht used the rounds as well, they were not made for the Luftwaffe exclusively, and the Wehrmacht had huge requirements, there were over 750,000 MG34 and MG42's produced for them, compared to 24,000 MG17's for the Luftwaffe.

The game shows the historical belt loadouts for both sides, as 'Default', and the SmK (H) is not even listed as part of the historical belt loadouts for 109E's.

we´ll see about that :cool:

€: meant as response to david Buzz! u just snuck in there mate ;)

Just a quick distraction from the forum furballing :grin:

Got two pilot kills in two hours yesterday, first time I've had two PK's since the old IL2 :cool:

Salute Notafinger

The reason no one flew the Hurricane was because it was 534 lbs overweight, stalled like a pregnant whale, and couldn't outturn the 109's unlike the historical aircraft. Even now most people prefer the Spitfire because of its better speed.

If you have a problem with the Spit DM, then I would suggest you provide proof and make it known.

This argument has no relevance to the issue of the use of these Tungsten rounds and whether or not that is accurate.

Which means what? That doesnt proove F** All!

You failed to grasp the point entirely. Hurricanes burn and wings break off. Spitfires do not burn and rarely a wing will break off. Blue pilots learned there was more effective way to kill Spitfires. It doesn't mean a damn thing if it's historic or not. It's in the game and people are going to use it. Get over it.

Don't worry Notafinger just leave him to it, he thinks that if he moans long enough the reds will get 200oct aircraft :rolleyes:

WHERE? Can you repost it!?

And the Mk2 Hurri with Hispanos

Since work on Clod is finished, shouldn't the discussion of these AP be a server's forum chat:)

I think it's perfectly reasonable to point out that a belt of 100% 8mm tungsten would most likely be historically inaccurate. That's fine I can understand that. Same with 100% 20mm AP or 100% 20mm HE. Generally speaking these ammo types were usually used in combination with others. However, even if they are used exclusively, and in a way that is not strictly historically accurate, you still have to hit the enemy to be effective. Moreover, with something like tungsten, you only really have an advantage if you can consistently hit the cockpit from the six or near six position. Honestly Buzz, unless you are suggesting these guys are using something other than skill (is that what you're suggesting?) to achieve those sorts of hits, I just think your blowing this thing completely out of proportion.

I haven't bothered to read all these pages but on two issues, here's my 2p;

Lag - IMHO definitely occurs. I have sometimes been hit by a 109 making a near head-on pass when his line of flight moved from 11 o'clock to my 1 o'clock to pass down my right hand side and at no time within normal guns range was he pointing at me unless he shot very early from 1000+ metres when he was last pointing at me. It seemed he could not have hit me from normal range at his angle. But.... bang! Dead. I accept that no Tracer can add to the impression of imposssible shots but I'm happy (happy?!) that when it happens, its probably lag.

PKs in general. Sudden unexplained PKs (no tracer) perhaps due to mine shells exploding in a cluster around the cockpit. No armour to the sides. Loud impacts/explosions (not like the sound of 7.62mm hitting the airframe), instant black screen. Or simply a 20mm in the right place.

I doubt very much that its hacking.

I just wish the damn 109 pilots would oblige with a few PK deaths from my 0.303" AP! :)
No wonder the RAF pilots began asking for heavier armament.

Sigh.

It's plain to see that for some people, this is more than a game. They have to "win". First the bogeyman was the Minegeschoss. Now it's the SMK(H).

Soon it will be, what?

I shudder to think what this place will be like when Fw 190s appear in game. The level of whining is going to be catastrophic.

Bf 109F. I am sure we will have numerous threads about how it was around only in very limited numbers in the summer of 1941... ;-)

Truth of the matter is, an all- SmK (H) belt is not any more or less ridiculus than an all- de Wilde belt... "historical belts" should be a server side option. I am sure the Reds would have issues with having some of their Brownings loaded all-ball. ;)

i hate tracers since with no depth perception they just obstruct the view so i use now traceless cordite VII and i wonder:

what are the best allied bullets with no tracers? in the game of course

i use a mix of de wilde and ap, i dont know if its the best but it works for me.

without tracers the enemy dont know when you miss :P , i use that too. do you fly online raid?

+1

Salute

Please don't accuse me of bias when that is clearly not the case.

I've never asked for performance better than historical, unlike some of those who have responded to my comments, several of which who admitted flying with 109 mods on public servers.

And by the way, I am record on any number of occasions noting the following:

1. 109's too slow on the deck
2. Hurricane and Spitfire 2 pitch planes climb too well.

And other suggestions for changes which would benefit the Blue side.

If you want to provide proof the Spitfire's damage model is incorrect, then I would suggest you do so.

All I see right now is a lot of response from those who fly Blue saying they want an ahistorical situation to continue so they can benefit.

Salute

Read the thread and you will see me on record as stating I don't think any of the pilot's mentioned were hacking. I didn't start this thread or make any of those allegations.

My issue is the modelling of this Sim.

The fact is, this is supposed to be a highly realistic simulation. (Unless I didn't read the box cover and promotion material correctly)

Not an Arcade game where the side with the most ways to exploit the botches in design. comes out on top.

All those who are complaining about the Spitfire's damage model... Why didn't you do something about it instead of muttering to yourself?

Why didn't you do some testing, provide proof to the Developers before the last patch??

I had suspected a long time that the Hurricane was modelled incorrectly, I did my research and provided proof it was overweight, and it got changed.

Just because those on the Blue side are too lazy to provide the proof required, (if it even exists) for a change in the Spitfire damage model is not my problem, it's theirs, despite their attempts here to try to associate my correctly provided information on the SmK (H) with a possible flaw in the Spitfire.

It's quite clear that those who are shouting the loudest were also those who were the quietest and most self satisfied when the Red aircraft were completely mismodelled and the 109's were sailing freely.

Now that things are more realistically modelled, (far from perfect, the engine cutout bug makes the Spits and Hurricanes far from historical at higher alts) the Blue side is complaining... perhaps no surprise.

That's not my problem and personally I don't care if some misinformed and one sided players want to attack me... just an indicator of their personal lack of character.

If I discover facts which bear my point out, I will continue to point out what I perceive as errors in this Sim, whatever others may say.

i like to play online but just on airquake i dont have the patience to look for for so long for a contact as in full real

i dont know now im tweaking my settings and have a better visibility i may give it a try :)

Beware! They are coming again! :) ATAG Friday 10/26 21.00 MSK/17.00 UTC and later

Details: http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.co...1169#post21169

http://i.imgur.com/GDA4X.jpg

point is, at this time, the game is ridiculously easy to be modified.. which means cheating is happening for sure in the online environment.

Tungsten ore (in German Tungsten = Wolfram) was in extremely short supply in Germany so that after no more Tungsten ore (Wolfram) supplies were available in adequate numbers to the German Arms Industry the Production of Weapons and tungsten cored ammo like the
2,8 cm schwere Panzerbüchse 41, 4,2 cm Pak 41, 7,5 cm Pak 41 and the 5,/7,5/ 8,8 cm Panzergranate 40 (H) (H= Hartkern aka Tungsten Core) had to be stopped.

Germany’s minimum requirements for Tungsten ore were 3,500 metric tons per year.

• 1939 4142 metric tons tungsten ore were imported from China, 62 from India, 638 from Portugal and 74 from Spain. Total: 4916 metric tons
• 1940 61 metric tons tungsten ore were imported from Portugal, 800 from China and 394 from Spain. Total: 1255 metric tons
• 1941 318 metric tons tungsten ore were imported from Portugal, 1100 from Spain. Total: 1418
• 1942 794 metric tons tungsetn ore were Imported from Portugal, 1100 from Spain. Total: 1894
• 1943 835 metric tons tungsten ore were Imported from Portugal, 1100 from Spain. Total: 1935
• 1944 895 metric tons tungsten ore were Imported from Portugal, 564 from Spain (smuggled). Total: 1459

Great sources for the shortage of Tungsten and many other urgently needed materials and also the overstreched german war industry is: Germany and the second World War Volume V/ I and II
http://www.amazon.com/Germany-Second.../dp/0198228872
http://www.amazon.com/Germany-Second...798559-3538864
CARUANA L.R. and ROCKOFF H.(2001): "A Wolfram in Sheep ́s Clothing: U.S.Economic Warfare in Spain, 1940-1944." NBER Working Paper No. H0132
LEITZ, C. (1996): Economic Relations Between Nazi Germany and Franco’ s Spain1939-1945. Clarendon Press. Oxford

5cm PaK/Kwk munition production did not stop IIRC (others were, but there were for example a very limited amount of Hartkern Pzgr. 40 produced for the (long) 8,8 Pak/KwK 43 gun. OTOH 5cm Pzgr. 40 was very commonly used in the Eastern Front in 1941 - one in three-four AP rounds fired IIRC.

The 7,92mm smk (H) tungsten cored small arms munition did stop by mid 1941, at which point stock of this ammuntion amounted to about 10 million rounds.

Stay classy bro.